I don’t think an agnostic thinks in terms of probability. I think what an
agnostic is saying is that it is unknowable, at least by him/her and quite
likely by anyone at all.
On Jul 19, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx" for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have gone through this over and over. The agnostic, by claiming that there
may as well be as not be a god or other supernatural being, effectively
assigns a fifty percent probability to the proposition. Yet, when you hear an
agnostic discuss the point it is clear that he or she does not really believe
that the chance is even. If that were the case they would most likely be in a
church at least every Sunday praying up a storm because a fifty percent
probability is a really high probability. Since they do not react as if they
are really facing such a high probability they are misnaming themselves. It
is not a matter of trying to force anyone to call themselves anything. It is
a matter of showing them that there is an obvious outcome, direction and
logical conclusion to their stance. No, I would not try to make an
African-American call himself a negro, but if he called himself a martian I
might very well point out that somewhere along the line he had made some kind
of mistake.
On 7/19/2015 2:46 PM, Alice Dampman Humel wrote:
Cowardly? Do you consider calling yourself an atheist an act of bravery or
courage? Why?
And if Carl or someone else wants to call himself an agnostic, who has the
right to make him call himself something else?
Maybe calling one’s self an agnostic is an act of courage, because one
admits that he, in fact, no one, really knows one way or the other? Saying
“I don’t know” is difficult for some people.
And if all the different races, even blind people demand to be called what
they want to be called at any given time, then why shouldn’t agnostics have
the same right?
You wouldn’t try to make an African-American call himself a Negro instead,
so IMO, the agnostic has the same right, particularly because whether anyone
else likes it or not, there is a difference in the two concepts, agnostic
and atheist.
On Jul 19, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Roger Loran Bailey (Redacted sender
"rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx" for DMARC) <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That is what I keep trying to tell Carl. An agnostic is just an atheist who
either hasn't figured it out yet or is too cowardly to admit to being an
atheist. And that applied to me when I was calling myself an agnostic too.
Remember that I told that story about how when I was twelve years old I was
flat out asked if I was an atheist. Of course I was, but until then I had
never thought of the word in connection with myself and had only heard it
in contexts in which it represented an incredible evil. I did not start
calling myself an atheist until I was eighteen and that was when someone
challenged my label for myself by pointing out that I kept making atheist
arguments while calling myself an agnostic.
On 7/19/2015 9:50 AM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
Carl, You are an atheist, but too chicken too call yourself one. All of us
who do not believe that the world is operated by a God to whom we can pray
for special favors, all of us who say that we do not have the answers to
why
things are as they are, we are atheists. Agnostics are people who are not
sure whether or not there is the kind of God that the religions worship.
My
husband would never take a stand on the question because, he said, he
wanted
to "hedge his bets". He didn't want to be kept out of heaven just in case
there might be one.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2015 1:28 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Demon Possessed?
Ah, those Atheists. Without Demons would indicate blamelessness.
Purity of heart. Strong and able to defend their Being from the corruption
of Demons.
As an Agnostic, I just can't say if I'm possessed or not.
Years ago I was at a gathering with my dad. A fellow came up to him and
they began talking. At some point the fellow asked dad if he knew the
phone
number for a mutual friend. Dad pulled out his little spiral notebook that
he carried in his shirt pocket at all times. He patted the book as he drew
it out. "My brain," he told the man.
And so it is, in my humble opinion, with those who carry their Bible
everywhere they go. That book is their brain. If it isn't in that book,
or
if they can't figure out how to "interpret" its words in a way to prove
their point, then it simply does not exist. You see, Roger, the Bible
thumpers will miss the point because they have already concluded that
Atheists themselves, are the Demons and Devils.
Carl Jarvis
On 7/18/15, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I just ran across this comment on Facebook. The bible thumpers will
without doubt miss the implications. The comment is, "Have you ever
noticed that if there is one group of people who are never possessed
by demons it is atheists?"
